So can we go ahead and say RIP December Collapse?

Chocolate Lab

Run-loving Dino
Messages
37,123
Reaction score
11,477
Last year, we had five December games and we went 2-3. Of course we all remember the last two games being huge losses; it's been written about ad naseum.

This year, due to the scheduling quirk of playing on a Thursday night, the fifth-from-last game was on November 29. If it had been a regular Sunday game or even a Saturday game, it would have been played in December. So I'm going to count it. The final stretch of games are what matter anyway, not the name that happens to be on the calendar.

Considering that, we're now 3-1 in our final four games, with one more to play. The final game can't really be counted, as it looks like we're going to play several backups. Frankly, I don't expect us to win. If we do, that'll be even better. But clearly, it's not a game we're going all-out to win.

The point is, after reading a billion articles and a ton of hand-wringing about how we always fail at the end of the year, can we declare this bogeyman dead and buried?
 

percyhoward

Research Tool
Messages
17,062
Reaction score
21,861
Under Parcells, we beat some pretty good teams in December. (KC at home the year they finished 10-6, Carolina on the road when they were a playoff team). We just couldn't beat good teams the second time we played them, and a lot of those happened to be December games.

This year when we swept the Giants it was the first time we won a same-season rematch against a team that finished with a winning record since the Campo era. We were 0-6 under Parcells in those games.

Yeah, I think we can bury the bogeyman.
 

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
101,936
Reaction score
112,997
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Chocolate Lab;1862173 said:
the fifth-from-last game was on November 29. If it had been a regular Sunday game or even a Saturday game, it would have been played in December. So I'm going to count it.

Considering that, we're now 3-1 in our final four games, with one more to play. The final game can't really be counted
Kinda bending the rules to fit your assessment just a little don't you think?
 

zeroburrito

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,767
Reaction score
1,001
big dog cowboy;1862348 said:
Kinda bending the rules to fit your assessment just a little don't you think?

so remove that game and add the loss for the skins game. another december collapse. is that better?
 

DragonCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,498
Reaction score
250
big dog cowboy;1862348 said:
Kinda bending the rules to fit your assessment just a little don't you think?

No. It's not.

The "December" collapse is not about teams going "OMG it's december, time to suck".

it's about Cowboys teams fading towards the end of the season.

Usually, we have 5 december games. Do you think our Parcells-seasons collapse over those 5 games were due to the fact they were at the end of the season or that it was December?

We're looking at the last 5 games. The difference between November 29 and December 1 is TWO days. For all intents and purposes it might as well be a December game.

I don't like the name "December collapse". It's not just december, it's a late season collapse. The OP was talking about how this season wasn't a late season collapse.

Also about the Commanders game, if Wade plays a lot of backups, do you really think that it's our ACTUAL team playing? No, because our starters would be sitting on the bench.

I'm not sure if you can say the late collapses are dead yet considering our last 10 quarters of football haven't been great.

However, I would hardly say that he's twisting the facts to further some agenda.
 

bbgun

Benched
Messages
27,869
Reaction score
6
big dog cowboy;1862348 said:
Kinda bending the rules to fit your assessment just a little don't you think?

Forget his thumb; his whole damn body is on the scale.
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,689
Reaction score
4,542
zeroburrito;1862366 said:
so remove that game and add the loss for the skins game. another december collapse. is that better?
Uh no, losing to the Skins with our backups does not count as a collapse, burrito boy.
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,689
Reaction score
4,542
kingwhicker;1862413 said:
No, I haven't seen great quality play out of this team for a few weeks now.
that's entirely different from a collapse.
 

InmanRoshi

Zone Scribe
Messages
18,334
Reaction score
90
kingwhicker;1862413 said:
No, I haven't seen great quality play out of this team for a few weeks now.

I agree. In fact, we're about 2 or 3 lucky bounces (quite literally in the case of several recovered fumbles in the Detroit and Carolina game) away from being in neck deep in "December Collapse' talk.
 

Big Dakota

New Member
Messages
11,876
Reaction score
0
Bottom line CL, this is a better team, all be it virtually the same team, under Wade than it was under Tuna.
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,689
Reaction score
4,542
big dog cowboy;1862348 said:
Kinda bending the rules to fit your assessment just a little don't you think?
Not at all, comparing the last five games of each of the past two seasons is better than an arbitrary decision on when the games were played.
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,689
Reaction score
4,542
InmanRoshi;1862440 said:
I agree. In fact, we're about 2 or 3 lucky bounces (quite literally in the case of several recovered fumbles in the Detroit and Carolina game) away from being in neck deep in "December Collapse' talk.
So if a team nearly collapses but doesn't it's still considered a collapse?
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,689
Reaction score
4,542
zeroburrito;1862449 said:
my post
|
|
|
|
|
|
your head
Conidering that everything you post is negative, let me apologize for not thinking you might actually make a positive remark.:rolleyes:
 

InmanRoshi

Zone Scribe
Messages
18,334
Reaction score
90
windward;1862447 said:
So if a team nearly collapses but doesn't it's still considered a collapse?

If a team only loses the ball once out of the 5 times combined they put the ball on the ground in two narrow victories, chalk it up to pure luck. Fumble recoveries are generally 50/50, with no real skill involved. It's just a matter of which way the ball bounces, and eventually opponents are going to start getting the bounces. Dallas isn't 2-1 so far this December because of their stellar play.
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,689
Reaction score
4,542
InmanRoshi;1862457 said:
If a team only loses the ball once out of the 5 times combined they put the ball on the ground in two narrow victories, chalk it up to pure luck. Fumble recoveries are generally 50/50, with no real skill involved. It's just a matter of which way the ball bounces, and eventually opponents are going to start getting the bounces. Dallas isn't 2-1 so far this December because of their stellar play.
It's still not a collapse.
 
Top